this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
213 points (83.2% liked)

politics

22705 readers
3315 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This article is awful for 3 reasons. Unfortunately each reason is one of the main hot takes the article tries and there is nothing redeeming otherwise - so maybe four reasons if you wanna get meta

1: Tyler Perry being decently-successful in media does not mean he owes people anything. More to the point, it is impossible to quantify what one person's success means to another. Even if they announce it at a speech, you've got no way to show a casual pattern.

2: It lumps in every tax break but completely ignores the localized benefits of those tax breaks. Georgia offers tax breaks to films because it makes them money.

The industry in Georgia was boosted substantially by tax incentives introduced in 2002 and strengthened in 2008. Just in the fiscal year 2017 film and TV production had an economic impact in Georgia of $9.5 billion, while industry sources claim that the tax subsidy costs the state $141 million (2010). (Wikipedia)

3: Perry, per the article's own admission, is giving substantially to the community in terms of pure charity

Perry earned plenty of glowing national headlines earlier this year for his philanthropy in donating $750,000 to help low-income seniors in Atlanta as property taxes increased.

Doesn't really make sense to paint him as the bad guy here by any of the angles the article tries to take.

I don't even care for Perry much, but this article is just misleading crap.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

If Jacobin stopped publishing misleading crap they wouldn't have any articles to print in the first place.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I stopped reading when the bullshit got this strong:

The irony is that these liberals, in addition to a weak commitment to hiking taxes on the rich, have their own version of the theory.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel like these people ask themselves at every slight annoyance "How could I blame his on liberals?". They're the types who'd criticize people making $75k a year for their wealth.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Right? It's pretty braindead to generalize "liberals" like this. Like yeah if I had ever heard of this before this article my reaction would not have been "oh that's great! Go black capitalism!!!"

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm looking forward to the future film he'll be making about himself and this incident: Tyler Perry's Tyler Perry, a Tyler Perry Film.

[–] Algaroth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

So much potential. Tyler Perry's Tyler Perry 2: Electric Tyler Perry: 2 Tyler 2 Perry.

[–] FontMasterFlex@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

why would you expect anything different? "trickle down" economics was always a scam.

load more comments